↓ Skip to main content

Bayesian alternatives for common null-hypothesis significance tests in psychiatry: a non-technical guide using JASP

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
300 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
287 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
603 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Bayesian alternatives for common null-hypothesis significance tests in psychiatry: a non-technical guide using JASP
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12888-018-1761-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel S. Quintana, Donald R. Williams

Abstract

Despite its popularity as an inferential framework, classical null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) has several restrictions. Bayesian analysis can be used to complement NHST, however, this approach has been underutilized largely due to a dearth of accessible software options. JASP is a recently developed open-source statistical package that facilitates both Bayesian and NHST analysis using a graphical interface. This article provides an applied introduction to Bayesian inference with Bayes factors using JASP. We use JASP to compare and contrast Bayesian alternatives for several common classical null hypothesis significance tests: correlations, frequency distributions, t-tests, ANCOVAs, and ANOVAs. These examples are also used to illustrate the strengths and limitations of both NHST and Bayesian hypothesis testing. A comparison of NHST and Bayesian inferential frameworks demonstrates that Bayes factors can complement p-values by providing additional information for hypothesis testing. Namely, Bayes factors can quantify relative evidence for both alternative and null hypotheses. Moreover, the magnitude of this evidence can be presented as an easy-to-interpret odds ratio. While Bayesian analysis is by no means a new method, this type of statistical inference has been largely inaccessible for most psychiatry researchers. JASP provides a straightforward means of performing reproducible Bayesian hypothesis tests using a graphical "point and click" environment that will be familiar to researchers conversant with other graphical statistical packages, such as SPSS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 300 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 603 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Macao 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 597 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 143 24%
Researcher 97 16%
Student > Master 68 11%
Student > Bachelor 44 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 38 6%
Other 125 21%
Unknown 88 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 222 37%
Neuroscience 58 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 6%
Social Sciences 28 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 4%
Other 94 16%
Unknown 141 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 188. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 June 2022.
All research outputs
#216,641
of 25,734,859 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#63
of 5,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,619
of 343,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#3
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,734,859 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,507 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,300 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.